In contemporary society, an increasing number of individuals are eschewing handwriting by traditional means such as pen, pencil, or brush. This shift stems from the widespread use of technological devices, particularly computers. The pervasive use of computers has led to a decline in manual writing, especially among the younger generation who are adept at utilizing digital tools for various purposes, including note-taking. This essay will first explore the primary reasons for this trend and subsequently offer an evaluation of its implications.
The declining practice of manual writing can be attributed to the omnipresence and versatility of technological devices. In educational settings, for example, students now predominantly rely on computers for note-taking, thereby neglecting the conventional use of notebooks and writing implements. As a result, the habit of manual note-taking has become less prevalent, particularly among the younger demographic who have grown accustomed to digital alternatives.
In considering this phenomenon from various angles, I am inclined to view it as a negative development, primarily due to the benefits associated with manual note-taking. For students, the act of physically writing notes with a pen or pencil has been linked to expedited learning. Research has shown that individuals who engage in handwritten note-taking, particularly when learning new vocabulary, demonstrate improved memory retention. This can be attributed to the cognitive engagement involved in the process, whereby the act of writing helps the brain to process and retain information more effectively, facilitating a deeper understanding of the subject matter.
In conclusion, the increasing reliance on technology for writing tasks has led to a diminishing number of individuals using traditional writing implements. While technological advancements offer greater efficiency in writing, particularly in educational contexts, the erosion of manual writing practices presents a notable drawback in terms of hindering optimal learning. Therefore, despite the convenience and efficacy of digital tools, it is essential to recognize and preserve the cognitive benefits associated with manual writing.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 24.0651302605 42% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1911.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 317.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 6.02839116719 5.12529762239 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21953715646 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.43620159709 2.80592935109 122% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586750788644 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 612.9 506.74238477 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.1864384518 49.4020404114 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.5 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6428571429 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.14285714286 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0955291967656 0.244688304435 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0368515295098 0.084324248473 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0366129337608 0.0667982634062 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.060676708073 0.151304729494 40% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524709598144 0.056905535591 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 13.0946893788 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 50.2224549098 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.99 12.4159519038 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.7 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 24.0651302605 42% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1911.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 317.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 6.02839116719 5.12529762239 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21953715646 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.43620159709 2.80592935109 122% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586750788644 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 612.9 506.74238477 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.1864384518 49.4020404114 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.5 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6428571429 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.14285714286 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0955291967656 0.244688304435 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0368515295098 0.084324248473 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0366129337608 0.0667982634062 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.060676708073 0.151304729494 40% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524709598144 0.056905535591 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 13.0946893788 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 50.2224549098 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.99 12.4159519038 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.7 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.